Dear Robin,

Great idea for a project!

Mariana Valverde has an article on bans of individual drinkers in  
Ontario -
A Postcolonial Women's Law? Domestic Violence and the Ontario Liquor  
Board's" Indian List," 1950-1990

M Valverde - Feminist Studies, 2004 - JSTOR

All the best,

Catherine


On 29-Oct-10, at 9:52 AM, Courtwright, David wrote:

> Robin and listmates,
>
> Interesting post. There's also a post facto version of person- 
> specific bans for drug users on probation or parole. It's called a  
> urine test.
>
> David
>
> David T. Courtwright
> Presidential Professor
> Department of History
> University of North Florida
> 1 UNF Drive, Jacksonville, FL 32224-2645 USA
>
> email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>; office phone: 904  
> 620-1872;
> office fax 904 620-1018; home phone 904 745-0530
>
> ________________________________
> From: Alcohol and Drugs History Society [[log in to unmask]]  
> On Behalf Of Robin G W Room [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 6:24 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: individual drinker bans -- back to the future
>
>
> Listmates --
>
>    Below you will find an initiative by the government of the  
> Northern Territory of Australia to institute a person-specific bans  
> on drinking.
>    There is an interesting cross-national piece to be done about  
> the prehistory of such measures, and I would be interested in  
> corresponding with ohters interested in this.  In temperance times,  
> there were various initiatives to "blacklist" heavy drinkers, often  
> at the call of family members.  It can be seen as  part of the move  
> in the Progressive Era to have the state intervene in the family on  
> behalf of the weak against the strong (cf. for the US Tony Platt,  
> The Child-Minders).  The supervisor of the Temperance Boards in  
> Sweden in 1940 described them as a defense for the family against  
> "petty domestic tyrants" (quoted from memory from the Helsinki ICAA  
> conference proceedings). Margaretha Jaervinen did an article in  
> Contemporary Drug Problems around 1991 about the Finnish alcohol  
> monopoly sending out inspectors to investigate where a woman seemed  
> to have been buying too much alcohol -- but not necessarily cutting  
> her off if it turned out she was buying for her husband as a way of  
> limiting his drinking -- i.e., using the wife as an agent of the  
> state's social control. The book Punched Drunk mentions the LCBO in  
> Ontario cutting off drinkers (putting them on what was known as the  
> "Indian list", in an era of Prohibition for nonassimilated  
> Aboriginal Canadians) in the 1950s at the request of wives and  
> other family members, although the statistics show clearly that  
> this request was often not accepted by the LCBO. There are still US  
> states with state liquor stores (Ohio, as I remember) where it is  
> theoretically possible for the family to ask the stores to  
> blacklist drinkers.
>
>     Particularly where there had been a period of Prohibition, the  
> alcohol control laws in the 1920s-1950s often included these  
> individually-oriented controls, which were abandoned nearly  
> everywhere in the 1950s-1960s as seeming too much of an intrusion  
> on emerging standards of "privacy". (Part of the background of the  
> "purple book", Bruun et al. 1975, was the argument by civil- 
> libertarian sociologists in a Finnish context that universal  
> control measures such as price and hours of sale could be effective  
> without these individual-oriented measures). Now, with the  
> emergence of ASBOs under Tony Blair and similar individually- 
> oriented behaviour controls, we are back to the future.
>     The historically-oriented piece should take a  look at how  
> effective such measures seem to have been.  One clear signal of  
> their potential effectiveness is the large rise in cirrhosis  
> mortality after the abandonment of the Swedish alcohol rationing  
> system in 1955, studied by Thor Norstroem.
>           Robin
>
> ________________________________
> some detailes from the attachedfact-sheet:
> Individual and Third-Party Referrals to the AOD Tribunal
> It is anticipated that other people, such as the police, family  
> members and health workers, will be able to ask
> the Tribunal to make orders against someone. For example, if one of  
> your family members has a drinking
> problem and is causing harm, you would be able to go to the  
> Tribunal and ask them to make an order banning
> your family member from purchasing take away alcohol. The AOD  
> Tribunal would look at what has been
> happening and your family member would be assessed by a professional.
>
> A person with an alcohol problem could choose to get themselves  
> banned so they can more easily deal with
> their alcohol or drug problem.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CCH Parliament [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, 28 October 2010 3:33 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Political Alert - Draft Alcohol Bills Tabled in Parliament  
> (NT)
>
> Please find attached:
>
> DRAFT ALCOHOL BILLS TABLED IN PARLIAMENT (NT)
>
> The Minister for Alcohol Policy, Delia Lawrie, released two key pieces
> of draft legislation that detail the most comprehensive alcohol  
> reforms
> in the Territory's history. The draft Bills, the Prevention of
> Alcohol-Related Crime and Substance Misuse Bill and the SMART Court  
> Bill
> were tabled in the Northern Territory Parliament.